If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Dilip seems to have changed camps - from abolition of corrupt courts, judges and lawyers (And somehow State Enforcement of The Natural Law) to "Enforced by a strong Judiciary and Police".
Bob A
Bob,
Don't believe what your nasty troll friend PP wants you to. I have always been in favor of a strong Judiciary enforcing the Natural Law. What should be scrapped is the multitude of corrupt, stupid laws our politicians, usually bribed by capitalists, have burdened the society with, and which the lawyers (liars) enjoy playing with, wasting everyone's time, energy and money... as in the half a billion dollar fine to Trump in his civil business case even though apparently, there was no breach of the Natural Law...
Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Sunday, 17th March, 2024, 09:38 AM.
"[Human] rights are not granted by government but are inherent to human nature and must be protected by government."
Well put.
Certain rights flow from the very "being/existence" of a person, from their "human nature". Constitutions are passed to protect these rights from abolition in lawby the majority/the State.
Bob A
Exactly, and the whole problem with DM is your desire to make the "bourgeoise pay" to steal their money that is unconstitutional. Even under WEF puppet dictator Trudeau's regime, as you can see from above, thanks to the courts holding up the legitimacy of the constitution, the aggrieved parties have their day in court that upheld the guise of the emergency act as uncondittuitonla.
Your proposal to confiscate anyone's assets that employ someone "bourgeoise" would leave millions of business owners impoverished, which involves shredding section 7 and section 8 of the Canadian Charter rights.
History is littered with examples of this playing out. Still, since you superficially read other CTer's posts at best, why would I expect a guy who thinks the globalists are "benevolent" and who refuses to see that governments are anything but a class of corrupt thugs. You don't bother with history or science except for maybe some garbage course on "dialectic materialism" or pseudo-sciences like climate change.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Saturday, 16th March, 2024, 01:04 PM.
Bob,
Don't believe what your nasty troll friend PP wants you to. I have always been in favor of a strong Judiciary enforcing the Natural Law. What should be scrapped is the multitude of corrupt, stupid laws our politicians, usually bribed by capitalists, have burdened the society with, and which the lawyers (liars) enjoy playing with, wasting everyone's time, energy and money... as in the half a billion dollar fine to Trump even though apparently, there was no breach of the Natural Law...
LOL, no strong judiciary needed to support Natural Law, as you have pointed out in the past. You just need one entity to at the very top of the elite to decide.
But you have given us a first insight into what exactly is "fair competition" under Libertarianism. You say with Trump's fines there was no breach of natural law. Well, Trump was fined for sexual assault. He was found guilty of sexual assault by a jury trial.
So you are telling us sexual assault falls under the LIbertarian "fair competition" clause. Supposedly this would be because men are competing for women, and grabbing them by any part of their body without their consent is part of the competition?
Every man and woman alike should be afraid of this. A man could be sexually assaulted by a gay man, and this would be ok under Libertarian law "fair competition". If the victim, male or female, fights off the assailant and injures the assailant, the assailant can under Libertarian law get judgement against the victim of the sexual assault, because the fighting back was not "fair competition" (but the initial assault was).
And regarding "the multitude of corrupt, stupid laws our politicians, usually bribed by capitalists, have burdened the society with" .... the only part of this you have trouble with is the bribing. Under Libertarian law, capitalists will no longer have to bribe anyone, because they can do anything they want under "fair competition". Bribing is an expenditure, and you want capitalists to be rid of that expenditure.
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Sunday, 17th March, 2024, 03:24 AM.
OK - so we now have Sid on the Libertarian spectrum - "Consequentialist Libertarian".
Dilip seems to have changed camps - from abolition of corrupt courts, judges and lawyers (And somehow State Enforcement of The Natural Law) to "Enforced by a strong Judiciary and Police".
So are Sid and Dilip now in the same Libertarian camp?
And I'll renew my earlier question to our resident Libertarians:
Does President Javier Milei of Argentina hold the Consequentialist Libertarian position (As it seems, now, do both Sid and Dilip)?
2nd Question: Does the Libertarian Party of Canada hold the Consequentialist Libertarian position?
Guys?
Bob A (Not a Libertarian)
No, you can see by Dilip's latest post that he has not "changed camps". He merely claims now to want a strong judiciary, but in the very next statement, he basically labels all lawyers as "liars".
Beware the wolves, they come dressed in sheep's clothing.
Believe what people tell you about themselves BEFORE they have to walk it back. Dilip is in apparent retreat because he has put his foot in his mouth. He even says now that Trump's sexual assault was not a breach of Libertarian Natural Law. So in his view, all sexual assault is ... ok.
I haven't followed Argentina since the election of Milei, so I personally can't say what he's going to do. If he destroys the legal system there, he's in Dilip's Natural Law cult. If not, he's less dangerous and maybe just a Consequentialist Libertarian and in that case, his government will in a year or two or three be overwhelmed by economic decline, probably a market crash, and will be returned to a more centrist or leftist party, either by election or by coup / civil unrest.
I don't know or care anything about the Libertarian Party of Canada. Going nowhere fast.
(First Presented by the Democratic Marxist Party of Ontario)
Goal: Sovereign,independent, neighbouring, peaceful States of Israel & Palestine
There must be a 7-Point UN Resolution that includes:
1. The authority of the UN to intervene in the self-declared sovereign State of Israel, on humanitarian grounds.
2. A non-party neutral UN Commission to develop a map of the “Two-State” Solution within the current area of Israel.
3. The “Golan Heights” part of Israel (Occupied Syria) shall be returned to Syria.
4. The UN Peace-keeping Forces will enter Israel, and enforce the new Two-State Boundaries, and try to bring peace to the Israeli and Palestinian citizens.
5. The then governments of Israel and Palestine will be recognized as the governments of the new “Israel” and the new “Palestine”.
6. The UN will immediately invite the Government of Israel and the Government of Palestine to send their own 3 persons to the new “UN Two-State Finalization Commission”, with a UN Moderator. Its task will be to report on changes that must be made to the UN interim solution.
7. Once the Government of Israel and the Government of Palestine sign off on the now final UN solution, the UN will withdraw its peace-keeping forces.
First of all ... you are responding to Bob A.'s question about Argentina and their new Libertarian leader ....
What in the world does this lawsuit have to do with Bob A.'s questions on Argentina?
Secondly ... because this lawsuit threatens both the Big 5 banks AND the very notion of government ability to contain emergency situations ....
I am guessing this lawsuit has 0% chance of success. However, we will see what comes out of it, and it could trigger a Canadian constitutional crisis. If indeed the WEF and cohorts are controlling everything that happens nowadays, they will gather the resources necessary to quash this lawsuit. After all, seizure of bank accounts is the very BASIS of the WEF's strategy for total world domination.
VIA DIGITALIZATION! THANKS TO SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS!
Something you should have foreseen years ago, Sid.
AND the very notion of government's ability to contain emergency situations
Oh, the self-inflicted brainless troll vomits out more nonsense. The notion that technological advancements inherently lead to negative societal impacts, like central bank digital currencies paired with social credit scores, overlooks the dual nature of technology—it can both challenge and reinforce power structures. The case of El Salvador adopting Bitcoin underlines how digital currencies can foster financial inclusivity and resist centralized control, contradicting fears of universal digital oppression.
Moreover, the Canadian Federal Court's ruling against the use of the Emergencies Act underscores the resilience of legal systems against overreach, suggesting that lawsuits by protestors have a legitimate foundation for challenging government actions. Dismissing their potential outright fails to appreciate the dynamic interplay between technology, society, and governance.
And Bob, in his post numbers 229 & 230, your imbecile troll of a friend talks about sexual assault not being a crime, by putting words into other's mouth, even though I was clearly referring to Trump's one half a billion dollar judgement (after future interest amounts adding on), which was about his property loans. What an evil person your troll of a friend PP is. Only an evil person like him can even think that sexual assault is not a crime, just as he has posted in the past on chesstalk about females wanting rape. Shameful to have him on our chesstalk!
Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Sunday, 17th March, 2024, 10:05 AM.
The case you are referring to has Trump penalized for fraudulently inflating corporate records, and the penalty is indeed going up. The successful prosecutor has mumbled about seizing some of Trump's properties on failure to pay by deadlines.
I believe Trump brought an unsuccessful application to stop the interest from running.
Don't know what Trump's timeline is to make payments.
Lastly, although Pargat and I agree on a lot of things, in fact, we will both post when we happen to want to publicly support some position of the other.
Oh, the self-inflicted brainless troll vomits out more nonsense. The notion that technological advancements inherently lead to negative societal impacts, like central bank digital currencies paired with social credit scores, overlooks the dual nature of technology—it can both challenge and reinforce power structures. The case of El Salvador adopting Bitcoin underlines how digital currencies can foster financial inclusivity and resist centralized control, contradicting fears of universal digital oppression.
Moreover, the Canadian Federal Court's ruling against the use of the Emergencies Act underscores the resilience of legal systems against overreach, suggesting that lawsuits by protestors have a legitimate foundation for challenging government actions. Dismissing their potential outright fails to appreciate the dynamic interplay between technology, society, and governance.
It is YOU, not I, who claims that the WEF and WHO and others are a clique about to take over the world and enslave everyone, i.e. "You will own nothing and be happy". These are YOUR claims, not mine.
So if you really believe that, then there can only be 1 explanation as to HOW this clique can control everyone: digitalization.
And if the clique does indeed take over all bank accounts and control EVERYONE'S access to resources via digital currency, then the game is over. No amount of protests are going to change anything at that point.
So if we are going to "protest" now while we can still make a difference, we should abandon all forms of digitalization, including the main one right now, smartphones. Is anyone going to do that? HAHAHAHAHA
No, all you have to do is look around at an airport or on the subway .... we are ALREADY enslaved.
And digitalization IS the natural consequence of technological progress. If there is an advanced alien society out there anywhere, they will utilize digital technologies or at the very least they will HAVE used it at some point in their technological evolution.
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Sunday, 17th March, 2024, 04:50 PM.
And Bob, in his post numbers 229 & 230, your imbecile troll of a friend talks about sexual assault not being a crime, by putting words into other's mouth, even though I was clearly referring to Trump's one half a billion dollar judgement (after future interest amounts adding on), which was about his property loans. What an evil person your troll of a friend PP is. Only an evil person like him can even think that sexual assault is not a crime, just as he has posted in the past on chesstalk about females wanting rape. Shameful to have him on our chesstalk!
IT IS NOT ME SAYING SEX ASSAULT IS NOT A CRIME, AND YOU KNOW IT. Deflection attacks, throwing your own crimes onto others, will not work, moron.
Your statement opens you to libel charges. Lucky you that CT is not read by any business or government people who might make decisions based on what they read here.
LOL LOL you just went back and edited your original post to indicate Trump's fines, adding the clause "for his civil business case" .... because you FORGOT TO DO THAT in your original post.
Nice try, Sherlock LOL
Ok, so now you say no, sexual assault is a crime. Obviously it was very low on your mind when you did your original post. To you, the big deal about Trump is his civil business case, the sexual assault case is way under your radar. So even if you think of sexual assault as a crime, it is of NO IMPORTANCE to you, far far less important than his business matters.
I say no, it is far MORE important than his business matters.
So tell us, genius .... why are the fines levied on Trump for his civil business cases NOT a breach of Natural Law?
It is ok under Natural Law to commit fraud? To falsely inflate the value of holdings for tax evasion or deflate them for insurance purposes?
I already know you won't answer this. You still refuse to define "fair competition' and this refusal makes you and your Libertarian visions irrelevant.
Oh, and by the way, many psychologists around the world posit that a not-insignificant number of women have rape fantasies and want to be raped. Repeating the opinions of others is not a crime, nor is it a crime to agree with such opinions. There are still neo-Nazis in the world and we don't prosecute them for their beliefs, they can even hold rallies (I guess now I have to make clear i am not a neo-Nazi, just using that as an example).
It looks like CENSORSHIP is part of the Libertarian vision.
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Sunday, 17th March, 2024, 04:46 PM.
DM: DM has only been implemented once in history, IMHO - Allende's Chile (1970-3). And I have said a number of times that it is only "effectively DM". It was a Unity Government of Democratic Socialists and the old-style USSR Chilean Communist Party. Neither of these IS Democratic Marxism.
Dilip persists in using evidence showing the problems of old-style USSR Communism, and dumping it at the feet of DM, as if there were no difference between DM and old-style USSR Communism (And Sid persistently does the same thing). The whole point of this thread is to educate interested CT'ers that they are DEFINITELY NOT the same. DM considers Old-style USSR Communism as a "Bastardization" of the fundamental thinking of Marx. It jettisoned human rights and democracy, and the elite Communist Establishment turned the revolutionary gun against the worker. Do I have to be clearer??
Now it is true that Sid and Dilip have done some good criticism posts of the Chile & its economy that I am highlighting.
But they also admit that Allende had formidable enemies, determined to make his government fail.
The Chilean Business Community and other Chilean Capitalists, kept ties to the military very close (Allende, democratically, did not change the leadership in the Chilean military, because it (One of the few in Latin America) had maintained in the past political neutrality - a fatal mistake). The CIA of USA was into Chile like a dirty shirt, organizing as much resistance to Allende as they could.
But Allende and his government remained popular, even after the election. The right wing conspiracy (It was covert at the time; to overthrow a sovereign government of a country) could not get the majority of Chileans to revolt in public protest. The Unity Government continued, as best it could, under great opposition, to implement a "Workers' Agenda".
So the Right went to "force" ........a military coup (NOT a peoples' revolution) under General Augusto Pinochet! Allende was surrounded by troops in the Presidential Palace; he knew he was about to be captured and tortured mercilessly; he gave his last presidential address, and committed suicide before being captured.
Now let's hear Dilip and Sid explain how all this was totally in line with the "Natural Law" they hold in such high esteem - unbridled world capitalism!
Was this in any way, shape or form justified under International Law? Is this what you guys mean by "doing no harm.......except..........by fair competition"?
Bob A (Dem. Marxist)
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Monday, 18th March, 2024, 06:38 AM.
The “Weekly Overview” of the topic is posted for the benefit of new members who may have come in between the “Weekly Overviews”. It provides an executive summary of the issue for new viewers.
The Stats of participation are important to allow all to determine the extent of continuing interest. For thread originators/responders, they are important to see if the interest no longer warrants the labour. Or alternatively, they show that those of us discussing it are drawing in more participants, because they have begun to see the importance of our topic
A. Statistics
1. Weekly Stats:
Week # 11 (24/3/11 – 3/17 [7 days])
(Sometimes Adjusted for no. of days)
.....................................................2024 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day Views/Day........Views/Day.............(11 wks.)
Last week's stats have totally leapt into the stratosphere in comparison with the stats of the prior week and 2024 so far! Phenomenal for what is fundamentally an “educational” thread. It caught fire last week!
CT'ers are interested in learning more about DM, and about government from the DM perspective.
And discussions/increased participation does happen when a current controversial issue is brought into the thread, and more were last week. There is discussion of current political affairs from the different perspectives of the various participants.
I, as originator/main poster, will now likely just post 1 discussion paper per week, near the start of the week, and try to respond to questioning responses.
This thread is an opportunity to learn something about the political system known as “Democratic Marxism”! It is also an opportunity to question DM in a good and safe forum, where we try to respect the right of all CT'ers to have their own analysis, and to be entitled to put it forward for consideration, even if differing from DM.
B. Goal of this Thread
To make clear what Democratic Marxism is, and what it is not (Old-style USSR Communism)
To provide materials that help CT'ers analyze the pluses and minuses of DM.
Additional Notes:
1. The goal of this thread is not to try to beat opposing views into oblivion. Political economy spans the spectrum. Every position is entitled to post as it sees fit, regardless of the kind of, and amount of, postings by other positions. What is wanted is serious consideration of all posts........then you decide among the many competing political philosophies.
2. CT'ers are welcome to post responses here regularly, in addition to our core group of very active responders.
DM: DM has only been implemented once in history, IMHO - Allende's Chile (1970-3). And I have said a number of times that it is only "effectively DM". It was a Unity Government of Democratic Socialists and the old-style USSR Chilean Communist Party. Neither of these IS Democratic Marxism.
Dilip persists in using evidence showing the problems of old-style USSR Communism, and dumping it at the feet of DM, as if there were no difference between DM and old-style USSR Communism (And Sid persistently does the same thing). The whole point of this thread is to educate interested CT'ers that they are DEFINITELY NOT the same. DM considers Old-style USSR Communism as a "Bastardization" of the fundamental thinking of Marx. It jettisoned human rights and democracy, and the elite Communist Establishment turned the revolutionary gun against the worker. Do I have to be clearer??
Now it is true that Sid and Dilip have done some good criticism posts of the Chile & its economy that I am highlighting.
But they also admit that Allende had formidable enemies, determined to make his government fail.
The Chilean Business Community and other Chilean Capitalists, kept ties to the military very close (Allende, democratically, did not change the leadership in the Chilean military, because it (One of the few in Latin America) had maintained in the past political neutrality - a fatal mistake). The CIA of USA was into Chile like a dirty shirt, organizing as much resistance to Allende as they could.
But Allende and his government remained popular, even after the election. The right wing conspiracy (It was covert at the time; to overthrow a sovereign government of a country) could not get the majority of Chileans to revolt in public protest. The Unity Government continued, as best it could, under great opposition, to implement a "Workers' Agenda".
So the Right went to "force" ........a military coup (NOT a peoples' revolution) under General Augusto Pinochet! Allende was surrounded by troops in the Presidential Palace; he knew he was about to be captured and tortured mercilessly; he gave his last presidential address, and committed suicide before being captured.
Now let's hear Dilip and Sid explain how all this was totally in line with the "Natural Law" they hold in such high esteem - unbridled world capitalism!
Was this in any way, shape or form justified under International Law? Is this what you guys mean by "doing no harm.......except..........by fair competition"?
Bob A (Dem. Marxist)
Dilip and Sid will NEVER define "fair competition". To do do would be to remove their sheep's clothing, exposing them as the wolves they are.
The only example we have so far is Dilip saying Trump's crimes in his business case for which he has been convicted and fined would NOT be crimes under Libertarianism. This means fraud to avoid taxes and high insurance premiums are fair competition.
We can only imagine many more business frauds would go unpunished.
Tweet
Comment